Once More Into the Breech

Menu

News

This is a little old (Nov 7th) in the context of our 24hr news cycle, but is well said and bears repeating. From HotAir…

The idea that we need to regulate the wider population more tightly in order to prevent catastrophically moronic operations by the feds gives me a warm glow deep in my libertarian heart. And I do mean catastrophic: Watch this new clip from ace CBS reporter Sharyl Atkisson updating the death toll from gunwalking. It’s not just Brian Terry.

…In a controlled delivery firearms case, guns are traced in the sense that agents closely and physically follow them — they don’t just note the serial numbers or other identifying markers. The agents are thus able to trace the precise path of the guns from, say, American dealers to straw purchasers to Mexican buyers.

To the contrary, Fast & Furious involved uncontrolled deliveries — of thousands of weapons. It was an utterly heedless program in which the feds allowed these guns to be sold to straw purchasers — often leaning on reluctant gun dealers to make the sales. The straw purchasers were not followed by close physical surveillance; they were freely permitted to bulk transfer the guns to, among others, Mexican drug gangs and other violent criminals — with no agents on hand to swoop in, make arrests, and grab the firearms. The inevitable result of this was that the guns have been used (and will continue to be used) in many crimes, including the murder of Brian Terry, a U.S. border patrol agent.

In sum, the Fast & Furious idea of “trace” is that, after violent crimes occur in Mexico, we can trace any guns the Mexican police are lucky enough to seize back to the sales to U.S. straw purchasers … who should never have been allowed to transfer them (or even buy them) in the first place…

Holder’s attempt is to claim that “Bush did it,” so the fact that the GOP is only asking about Holder proves this is all a partisan smear. Well, Bush didn’t do it, actually, and further, the GOP was asking about the Bush era programs too.

So: Holder implicitly claims he can’t release documents because they’re too confidential, but then decides on his own to give them to the press when he thinks it might help them?

Or: Holder ignores a constitutional, lawful demand for information, but then releases information on his own initiative to bail his corrupt, Marc Rich pardon-purchasing ass out?

Either way. It’s hard to say why Holder refused to comply, because he doesn’t offer reasons — he just ignores the requests entirely.

There was no government-to-government coordination like in Operation Wide Receiver, and there may have been something far more sinister at play here than just a botched Federal operation… the resuscitation of nationwide gun control.

…from the beginning the scheme was to pad statistics on U.S. guns in Mexico in order to be in a strengthened position to call for gun bans and strict gun control at a time when it was politically unpopular. Further, the scheme would involve a made-up statistic, out of thin air–90%–which then had to be proved by using civilian gun retailers along the southern border as unsuspecting pawns to walk U.S. guns into Mexico by ATF agents, straw purchasers, and others with connections to Mexican drug cartels.

And the evidence points to the fact that Hillary Clinton was one of the original Administration officials who was ‘in the loop’ on the scheme from the very beginning.

It’s a pity that investigators are limiting their scope (for now) to the DOJ. This may never get back up the chain to President Obama; seldom does. However, we know this administration’s attitude toward the 2nd Amendment, owners of firearms, and the nation’s (legal, responsible) gun culture. The President, frankly, doesn’t need to say anything… his people know his goals and shared them from the beginning.

As for Sec Clinton, we know how Clintons feel about so-called, erroneously named “assault weapons” and the lengths they’ve gone to ban them in the past. We just didn’t expect them to start arming criminal organizations with them on purpose as means to that end.

God willing, more heads at all levels will roll on this… it’s the least we can do for the victims of this government-created chaos.

WASHINGTON — Nearly half of the guns that crossed state lines and were used in crimes in 2009 were sold in just 10 states, according to a report being released Monday by a mayors’ group.
…
Forty-nine percent of those guns were sold in Georgia, Florida, Virginia, Texas, Indiana, Ohio, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, California or Arizona.

California – #1 state by population – Leans BLUE
Texas – #2 state by population – Leans RED
Florida – #4 state by population – PURPLE
Pennsylvania – #6 state by population – Leans BLUE
Ohio – #7 state by population – PURPLE
Georgia – #9 state by population – Leans RED
North Carolina – #10 state by population – Leans RED

These seven states alone have a population of approximately 124 million people.

The entire list has a population of 145 million people.

With a population of 307 million (US estimate 2009)…

…that means these 10 states on the list has 47% of the population.

This is a great example of torturing numbers long and hard enough to force the confession you want to hear. Forty-seven percent (47%) of the population in the United States lives in 10 states, and 49% of the illegal guns purchased come from that 47% of the population.

There is no real story here.

This isn’t a Republican vs. Democrat issue in this case either as there are blue, red, and states that straddle political lines.

No kidding, MAIG? Ten (10) states in the Union are responsible for 49% of the guns, and 47% of the population happens to live in those 10 states?

At the beginning of August, five eco-mentalist organization submitted a petition to the EPA, requesting a ban on all lead-based ammunition, claiming, “the use of traditional ammunition by hunters is inconsistent with the Toxic Substance Control Act of 1976.”

The petitioners to the EPA included American Bird Conservancy, the Center for Biological Diversity, Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility, the Association of Avian Veterinarians and, Project Gutpile.

Grass-roots and industry backlash was rallied by the National Shooting Sports Foundation (a trade association), and a few days later the NRA weighed in.

After spending a few weeks re-discovering its level of authority, the petition was denied and the EPA’s response is here.

Dave Workman, Seattle Examiner Gun Rights columnist, has an excellent write-up on this month-long issue… the best bit is this (emphasis mine):

The NRA did the right thing. It reminded the EPA that the law — you know, that’s the thing environmentalists draw like a gun when they want to force people to do something — does not allow what those same environmentalists were trying to do. The NRA didn’t make anybody “surrender.” The NRA merely insisted that the statute be followed.

Hunters and others involved in shooting sports are among the top conservationists in the land. We want game animals and the rest of the environment to thrive so that the same enjoyment can be had for the next generation and many after. And through gaming licenses/fees, excise taxes, fund-raising efforts by many different conservation groups, and personal responsibility, we put our money where we run our mouth.

Personally, I wasn’t too worried, as such a ban would have been a considerable overreach. However, if there’s one thing this current administration will be remembered for, it is its penchant for just that sort of thing.

It was the moment of greatest peril for then-Sen. Barack Obama’s political career. In the heat of the presidential campaign, videos surfaced of Obama’s pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, angrily denouncing whites, the U.S. government and America itself.
…
The crisis reached a howling pitch in mid-April, 2008, at an ABC News debate moderated by Charlie Gibson and George Stephanopoulos. Gibson asked Obama why it had taken him so long – nearly a year since Wright’s remarks became public – to dissociate himself from them. Stephanopoulos asked, “Do you think Reverend Wright loves America as much as you do?”
…
Watching this all at home were members of Journolist, a listserv comprised of several hundred liberal journalists, as well as like-minded professors and activists.
…
According to records obtained by The Daily Caller, at several points during the 2008 presidential campaign a group of liberal journalists took radical steps to protect their favored candidate. Employees of news organizations including Time, Politico, the Huffington Post, the Baltimore Sun, the Guardian, Salon and the New Republic participated in outpourings of anger over how Obama had been treated in the media, and in some cases plotted to fix the damage.
…
But it was [Spencer] Ackerman [of the Washington Independent] who had the last word. “Kevin [Drum — then of Washington Monthly], I’m not saying OBAMA should do this. I’m saying WE should do this.”

“When you go to the unemployment office there’s many U.S. citizens who are unemployed construction workers and they don’t have jobs because right now, some of those construction companies find it easier to hire undocumented workers,” said Reporter Nathan Baca.

“I think that any information you have in that regard is absolutely without foundation,” responded Reid.

But a Pew Hispanic Center study shows 17-percent of all construction workers are in the United States illegally. Reid says not in Nevada. “That may be some place, but it’s not here in Nevada.“

But their latest 2009 numbers show Nevada is the state with the highest percentage of “unauthorized immigrants” in the labor force.

Congressman Loses Cool To Students With A Flip Cam, But Comes Out The Hero?

No he’s not a hero. He’s a jerk. But…as is always the case, there is more to the story.
…
The democratization of communications technology is generally lauded as a great advancement for civilization. But during a time of heated partisan divide — caused, in part, by a Balkanizing landscape of opinion media — well, one wonders if we really want an army of aggressive college kids accosting public servants until someone eventually loses their cool.
…
Etheridge’s actions are only partially defensible. He need not have gotten physical with the students who asked him the provocative question regarding his support of the “Obama Agenda”
…
The YouTube video is published under an account titled TonyManization, and even more damning is that the faces of the individuals asking the Congressman questions are blurred out.
…
Which brings us back to Etheridge’s response. Yeah – he comes off as a jerk, but…when in Rome.

Good Lord, Colby. The Congressman’s actions, regardless of affiliation, are indefensible. Yet, that these citizens dared ask him, a Democrat, a question, it is deemed, “provocative,” that they blurred out their own faces is, “damning,” and Etheridge’s actions are, by your reason of deduction, “partially defensible.”

Incidentally, here is the video in question — hopefully YouTube doesn’t go gutless and try to remove it as they often do when Democrats are the target of any questioning or scorn:

Mediaite: chain up your little lapdog/part-time sockpuppet and find someone else to do some real analysis. I understand that you generally lean “left,” but I’d recommend not leaning too far “idiot.”

Washington, DC, Jun 14 – U.S. Rep. Bob Etheridge (D-Lillington) released the following statement on the viral video which appeared on the internet today:

“I have seen the video posted on several blogs. I deeply and profoundly regret my reaction and I apologize to all involved. Throughout my many years of service to the people of North Carolina, I have always tried to treat people from all viewpoints with respect. No matter how intrusive and partisan our politics can become, this does not justify a poor response. I have and I will always work to promote a civil public discourse.”